The recent court case in which Cheltenham Council failed in its attempt to sue its former managing director for not declaring her history of depression attracted much comment – mostly on the side of candidates’ right not to tell all. That is fine if the matter withheld really is long in the past; then why would an ex-condition ever come to light. It was because the condition was anything other than past that the lady’s medical history was relevant.
The root of the problem was, of course, the Council’s sloppy recruitment practices. They relied on a loosely-worded medical questionnaire that included such gems as “Do you normally enjoy good health?” Well, if I suffered from depression I would enjoy my occasional days of good health very much indeed. A self-administered questionnaire (even a better-drafted one) may be sufficient for run-of-the-mill jobs but appointing an MD should be treated more seriously.
The role of HR is one of the most linked-to tags in frankly HR and here is a good example of where HR can get it wrong. Clearly, I do not know the ins and outs of Cheltenham’s recruitment and HR processes but staffing – getting the right people into the right posts should be a central plank of any HR department’s role and is key to its reputation.
All to often, HR limits itself to setting up the recruitment processes and ducks out of the decision-making. There are many regulations and considerations of ‘fairness’ that HR must impose on reluctant line managers but there is a duty to the employer as well as to potential employees. If HR is not seen to be on both sides of that recruitment equation managers will draw the obvious conclusion.
